• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

British budget troubles

.....But last night a senior Ministry of Defence source said: "FRES is dead in the water. It's a dead duck. It is the definition of everything that is wrong with the MoD's procurement process."

From MarkOttawa's post above my last ArmyRick.....The FRES programme seems to have gone the way of the Norwegian Blue.

My reaction was to the, IMHO, overwrought assertion that without the FRES programme the Brit Army is doomed to continue to live with 1970s kit (Scorpions, Saxons, FV 432s and Warriors).
 
They only Scimitar, spartan, sultan and samritan in the CVR family. The scorpion and saber are phased out of service.
 
Thanks...couldn't remember the others in the series.
 
They had the Stormer model that was picked overseas that offered a larger hull and upgrades. So the turrets could once again to be shifted over to a new hull for minimal design cost. Maybe I should relabel the Vixen design and submit it with a turret from the Grizzly.  :nod:
 
Really the few:

RAF cuts 'could make Britain's air space vulnerable to attack'
Cuts to the RAF could leave Britain unable to defend its air space, counter threats from hostile states or conduct major foreign military campaigns, its senior officers have warned David Cameron.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/8060600/RAF-cuts-could-make-Britains-air-space-vulnerable-to-attack.html

Air Chief Marshal Sir Stephen Dalton has begun a last-ditch attempt to save scores of combat jets as ministers prepare to make deep cuts in Britain’s air power, The Daily Telegraph has learnt.

In a private speech for MPs on Monday night, the RAF leadership challenged the Prime Minister’s criticism of “Cold War” fighter jets and questioned the decision to favour the Army in the Strategic Defence and Security Review.

Whitehall sources say the intervention may have come too late. At a meeting of the National Security Council yesterday, the Navy won its battle for two new aircraft carriers. With the Army facing only modest cuts, the RAF is now in line to bear the brunt.

Plans to order 138 new F35 Joint Strike Fighters are set to be cut to around 50 [emphasis added], and the RAF’s entire fleet of Tornadoes faces the axe after next week’s review. It would lead to the loss of RAF bases in Lossiemouth and Marham and of almost 5,000 personnel...

Amid growing fears for the RAF, several aspects of the Prime Minister’s analysis of future defence needs were rejected in the speech. Last week, Mr Cameron indicated the RAF would face deep cuts, saying: “We’ve got aeroplanes that are ready to do dog fights with the Soviet Union air force. That’s not right.”

But Air Marshal Anderson, one of the most senior commanders in the RAF, said: “High-end air capabilities are not synonymous with Cold War ‘white elephants’”.

In a strong defence of the RAF’s fleet of fast jets, his speech argued that the Quick Reaction Alert Force of Tornadoes and Typhoons was vital to national security “despite what amateur theorists might assert from their armchairs”.

“Without such an air defence capability, the UK would not be able to guarantee security of its sovereign air space and we would be unable to respond effectively to a 9/11-style terrorist attack from the air.”

Ministers have said that the Army should be shielded from the worst of the cuts while troops are in Afghanistan — Mr Cameron’s deadline for an Afghan withdrawal is 2015...

...as the defence review nears conclusion, substantial allowances have been made to the Navy, with much of the Fleet surviving significant cuts and the future of the two new aircraft carriers secured.

It is understood that the Navy will not suffer severe cuts to its surface fleet despite offering up to half of its warships to secure the carriers [emphasis added].

Ministers have indicated that one of Britain’s current fast jets, either Tornado – operated by the RAF – or Harrier – mostly operated by the Navy, faces immediate “deletion” in the defence review. The Navy’s successful defence of the £5.2billion carrier project has intensified RAF fears for the Tornado...
 

Mark
Ottawa
 
And if the RAF 's budget is cut any further they simply wont be able to deliver on providing the RN with 24/7fleet air cover. (this reference to a rather infamous promise the RAF made in the early sixties as the RN retired it's Aircraft Carriers)
 
MarkOttawa said:
Really the few:

RAF cuts 'could make Britain's air space vulnerable to attack'
Cuts to the RAF could leave Britain unable to defend its air space, counter threats from hostile states or conduct major foreign military campaigns, its senior officers have warned David Cameron.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/8060600/RAF-cuts-could-make-Britains-air-space-vulnerable-to-attack.html
 

Mark
Ottawa
In all honesty, what threat is british airspace under?
 
The following story from the Daily Telegraph is reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.


David Cameron has intervened to halt a revolt by some of the most senior figures in the military over the scale of defence cuts.

By James Kirkup and Andrew Porter
Published: 10:00PM BST 15 Oct 2010

The Prime Minister made his move after being told by the new head of the Army that proposed reductions in the Forces threatened Britain’s mission in Afghanistan.

General Sir Peter Wall, the Chief of the General Staff, made clear to Number 10 that he could not accept cuts in Army numbers and training which would hamper the Afghan operation. In the wake of Sir Peter’s warning, Downing Street sources last night said Mr Cameron had blocked a Treasury demand for a 10 per cent cut in the defence budget.

Mr Cameron told the Treasury that he would not accept substantial reductions in Army numbers. Downing Street sources added that Mr Cameron was insistent that more savings be made from Trident.

Final details of the budget deal were still being hammered out last night in Whitehall, and military sources refused to declare victory in the power struggle.

Mr Cameron’s intervention followed a day of threats from senior defence figures. The angry response from the top brass came after the Treasury attempted to force the Ministry of Defence to make cuts deeper than those which had been agreed previously. Military chiefs had described the move as a “betrayal”.

It had appeared on Thursday that Dr Liam Fox, the Defence Secretary, and George Osborne, the Chancellor, had agreed a deal for a seven per cent cut to the MoD budget. But the Treasury position hardened yesterday morning, with officials making renewed demands for 10 per cent cuts.

The last-minute switch caused fury at the MoD, and Forces chiefs were sent to Downing Street for crisis talks. In private meetings, senior commanders told Mr Cameron’s team the bigger cuts package would undermine the Afghan war and potentially force Britain into a humiliating early withdrawal.

According to sources in No 10 and the MoD, Gen Wall made clear he was not prepared to support the cuts being demanded. However, they said he did not go as far as threatening to resign.

Army sources said the full cut demanded by the Treasury would have meant a loss of 7,000 men and the removal of up to four front-line infantry battalions. Army training operations would also have been affected, ultimately impacting on the Afghan operation, the Army warned.

The Prime Minister will spend the weekend trying to finalise the defence and spending review at Chequers. The strategic defence review will be unveiled on Tuesday, followed a day later by the comprehensive spending review.

Mr Osborne has been pushing for Dr Fox to accept a budget cut of 10 per cent. But after weeks of wrangling, the Defence Secretary believed he had secured a cut of just 7 per cent.

When the Treasury appeared to renege on that deal, there was thinly disguised fury directed towards Mr Osborne.

One senior defence figure said: “The Chancellor doesn’t have the first idea of what we do. He doesn’t understand defence and he doesn’t like defence. He’s no better than Brown.”

A senior Navy figure added: “This was supposed to be settled, then the Treasury pulled the rug out from under us.”

On Thursday, Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, and Robert Gates, the secretary of defence, both expressed fears over cuts to Britain’s Armed Forces.

The US is worried that Britain might fall short of the Nato standard of spending at least 2 per cent of GDP on defence. Yesterday, Mr Cameron’s spokesman refused to say whether that commitment would be met.
 
Revolting British admirals, generals and air marshals (and the F-35)
http://unambig.com/revolting-british-admirals-generals-and-air-marshals/

This is extraordinary and unimaginable, I think, on the part of the CF’s senior leadership in terms of the furious–in both senses–leaking and the publicity the UK military are generating against the government–probably not a Good Thing in a democracy.  But then public support for the British services is much broader and deeper than support for our forces is in Canada.  And of course the three services are fighting each other like cats, dogs and (?) ferrets (especially the RN vs. the RAF)...

Mark
Ottawa
 
Strategic Defense and Security Review--MoD news release here,
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/DefencePolicyAndBusiness/StrategicDefenceAndSecurityReviewPublished.htm

full text (see Part Two esp.):
http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_191634.pdf

See also for F-35:
http://unambig.com/uk-how-many-f-35s-who-knows-but-fewerdefence-reviews/

Mark
Ottawa
 
Altair said:
In all honesty, what threat is british airspace under?

Right now, they get the same visitors we do, only more frequently. 5/10 years from now, who knows right ?
 
I still can't believe that they are getting rid of the Nimrod and closing Kinloss.  They are taking themselves out of an important piece of the ASW puzzle.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-11565829
 
Dolphin_Hunter said:
I still can't believe that they are getting rid of the Nimrod and closing Kinloss.  They are taking themselves out of an important piece of the ASW puzzle.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-11565829

No more debauchery at the Abbey Inn..........I'm sad  :'(
 
Dolphin_Hunter said:
I still can't believe that they are getting rid of the Nimrod and closing Kinloss.  They are taking themselves out of an important piece of the ASW puzzle.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-11565829

I'm pretty sure the defence cuts will be dwarfed by these other cuts. Feet and knees together, here comes 1979-80 again (thank Gawd)!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/liberaldemocrats/8074669/Danny-Alexander-reveals-500000-job-cuts-in-document-gaffe.html

 
These are painful personnel cuts to the British military. When adding the total expected personnel cuts of approximate 42,000 by 2015, of total army navy and air force and civilians, this is an extremely devastated day for the families and to their communities. I remember the military cuts enacted by former Prime Minister Jean Chretien in the 1990S, at the former Downsview Canadian Forces base in Toronto, where hundreds to thousands of people and families and community were hurt by the military cuts. I had friends on the base and knew their emotional hurt and they had to find ways to support their families. These cutbacks have been called the Canadian military's “Decade of Darkness”. Also, over a decade, the local economy area has stagnated since the major closings. Today the former base military base has a small military presence, and now is a mostly called the dead Downsview Urban Park, that will be sold land to developers. The British military personnel & families do not deserve the day of execution, because of political budget cutbacks. The British military and country will have their own “Decade of Darkness”!

Reference
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/DefencePolicyAndBusiness/StrategicDefenceAndSecurityReviewPublished.htm

 
Altair said:
In all honesty, what threat is british airspace under?

http://www.thecourier.co.uk/News/article/6472/jets-scrambled-hours-before-defence-review.html
 
So let me get this straight? Royal Navy Aircraft carriers fitted for but not with aircraft.
 
GK .Dundas said:
So let me get this straight? Royal Navy Aircraft carriers fitted for but not with aircraft.

Thats pretty much it.
 
Back
Top